Legal Challenges in the Application of Wife’s Agency Clause in Divorce

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Assistant Professor Women Research Center. Alzahra University. Tehran. Iran.

2 PhD in Public Law. Department of Public Law, Faculty of Law, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

The main legal basis for granting legal agency in divorce is Article 1119 of the Civil Code. According to the mentioned Article, “the parties to the marriage contract can make any clause that is not contrary to the requirements of the said contract, in addition to the marriage contract or other necessary contracts, such as stipulating that whenever the husband takes another wife or disappears within a certain period or abandons almsgiving or attempts to harm the wife’s corporal integrity or misbehaves in such a way that the life intolerable, the wife should be entrusted with a lawyer and a lawyer who divorces herself after proving the fulfillment of the condition in the court and issuing the final verdict.
This type of power of agency is realized if all the contract conditions are fulfilled and the court confirms it. Nowadays, many divorce lawsuits are done by the agency, either by using the marriage contract clauses or by a regulatory agency in notary public offices, usually known as an independent agency. Therefore, the presence of any ambiguity or disagreement in the nature and implementation of the law by lawyers and jurists will directly impact the parties’ rights and how the law is implemented, even making the agency abort. On the one hand, the challenges are related to the nature of the agency and its effects, and on the other hand, filing a lawsuit and leading to a verdict by using an agency in divorce. One of the conceptual challenges is the wife’s right to divorce. Does granting the wife the right to divorce mean granting agency to the wife in divorce?
The other challenge is the husband’s motivation to grant the wife agency. Sometimes, in his defense, the husband states that his motivation for granting agency was “encouraging the wife” to “continue life together” and not that the wife proceeds with divorce. In this way, this claim may take on a legal aspect that the courts consider as part of the will of the couple in granting agency. In such a case, i.e., the non-continuity of the shared life, is the legal agency also ruled out?
The third challenge is the non-granting of the power of attorney in divorce. Does a divorce lawyer have all the powers related to divorce, such as accepting a dowry? Another challenge is if the lawyer does not respect the couple’s interests in divorce, what measures can the couple take? Apart from formal challenges and the challenge of the lack of urgency in applying the wife’s conditional power of attorney after the fulfillment of the conditions, others, such as the challenge of the validity of the wife’s power of attorney in the case of the husband’s appeal after the divorce, the challenge of the husband’s intervention in the legal process, the request for divorce with proof of hardship and embarrassment and the condition of power of attorney, the challenge of the court in adopting the type of final decision can be mentioned.
 In this research, the challenges have been examined, and methods and arguments have been made to adjust and combine the substantive and formal rules of agency and proceedings, providing the basis of rationality and purposefulness in these claims. The court’s action in preventing the husband’s involvement in the divorce makes such an agency similar to granting the right of agency to the wife in divorce, which is against the traditional rules of representation and the foundations of our legal system. It seems that the judicial procedure regarding the agency in divorce establishes a different type of agency. The legislator must understand the era’s requirements, make the necessary legislation to maintain harmony, and clarify the person’s duty in referring to the courts in applying for agency in divorce.
 

Keywords


  1. منابع

    1. ابن ابی جمهور، محمد (1405ق). عوالی الئای العزیزیه فی الاحادیث الدینیه. ج1، قم: دار سیدالشهداء للنشر.
    2. اسدی، لیلا سادات؛ فریده شکری (1394). آیین دادرسی و امور و دعاوی خانوادگی. چ اول، تهران: دانشگاه امام صادق (ع).
    3. حلی، محقق،؛جعفر بن حسن نجم‌الدین1408ق). شرائع الإسلام فی مسائل الحلال و الحرام، ج2، چ دوم، قم: مؤسسة اسماعیلیان.
    4. حاجی عزیزی، بیژن؛ سیده مریم اعتماد (1394). ضمانت اجرای عدم رعایت مصلحت در وکالت. مطالعات اسلامی، 47، شمارۀ پیاپی 100، 55-73. در : 7/fiqh.v47i20.22474 (20 آذر 1400)
    5. حبیبی­تبار، جواد (1395). گام به گام با حقوق خانواده. چ دوم، تهران: میزان. 19. در: https://www.noormags.ir/view/fa/artic (12دی 1400)
    6. سروش محلاتی، محمد (1387). ابهامات فقهی-حقوقی وکالت زوجه در طلاق. فقه و حقوق، 5(18)، 59-86. https://hoquq.iict.ac.ir/article_.pdf(12دی 1400)
    7. صفایی، سیدحسین؛ اسدالله امامی (1393). مختصر حقوق خانواده. تهران: میزان.
    8. طاهری، حبیب‌الله (1418ق). حقوق مدنی. ج2، چ دوم، قم: دفتر انتشارات اسلامی وابسته به جامعة مدرسین حوزة علمیة قم.
    9. طوسی، ابوجعفر محمد بن حسن (1387ق). المبسوط فی الفقه الامامیه. ج5، چ سوم، تهران: المکتبه المرتضویه لاحیاء آثار الجعفریه.
    10. عابدی، محمد؛ علی ساعتچی و فرزاد جاویدی آل‌سعدی (1393). وکالت در مقام بیع. فصلنامة پژوهش حقوق خصوصی، 3(8)، 101-119. در: https://jplr.atu.ac.ir/ar869.html(15دی 1400)
    11. عاملی (شهید اول)، محمد بن مکی (1410ق). اللمعة الدمشقیة فی فقه الإمامیة. بیروت- لبنان: دار التراث - الدار الإسلامیة.
    12. غریبه، علی (1385). قابلیت عزل وکیل با واسطه در وکالت بلاعزل با حق توکیل غیر. فصلنامة علامه، (9)، 187-198. در: http://ensani.ir/file/download/article/.pdf (15 دی 1401)
    13. قاسم‌زاده، سیدمرتضی (1375). وکالت بلاعزل. ماهنامة کانون، 15-47.http://ensani.ir/file/download/article (1 بهمن 1400)
    14. کاتوزیان، ناصر (1371). حقوق خانواده. ج1، تهران: شرکت سهامی انتشار.
    15. کاتوزیان، ناصر (1387). حقوق مدنی: نظریة عمومی - ایقاع معین. تهران: میزان.
    16. مدنی، سیدجلال‌الدین (1386). وکالت در حقوق مدنی. ماهنامة کانون، (73)، 82- 97. در:https://ensani.ir/fa/article/    (21 آذر 1400)
    1. مطهری، مرتضی (1395). بیست گفتار. ج1، چ چهل‌وسوم، تهران: صدرا.
    2. نجفی، صاحب الجواهر، محمدحسن (1404ق). جواهر الکلام فی شرح شرائع الإسلام. ج 27، چ هفتم، لبنان: دار إحیاء التراث العربی.
    3. نقیبی، سیدابوالقاسم؛ ابراهیم تقی‌زاده مرتضی شهبازی­نیا و عباس باقری (1392). جایگاه حسن نیت در عقد وکالت. دوفصلنامة علمی-پژوهشی دانش حقوق مدنی، 2(1)، 39-49. در:  https://clk.journals.pnu.ac.ir/article_599.html